What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooleylinguistlist.org.

The present volume on standard and variation in German, with the provocative subtitle of how much variation the German language can tolerate is the 2004 edition of the yearbook of the 'Institut für Deutsche Sprache' (IDS) and was published on the occasion of its fortieth annual conference. Edited by Ludwig Eichinger and Werner Kallmeyer, the book amply illustrates current research paradigms in German dialectology, sociolinguistics and applied linguistics from a variety of contrasting but complementary standpoints. From conceptual approximations to historical motivations, from formal linguistic categorizations to social identity formations, from pedagogical deliberations to German studies abroad, the collection of articles clearly demonstrates that variation has made its way into the sphere of the German standard language, leaving behind its formerly marginalized position of non-standard. The following paragraphs aim at briefly summarizing the different contributions to this volume, that is, the different answers its authors are suggesting with respect to the overarching question of how much variation the German language can accommodate.

In the first chapter, Heinrich Löffler explores the various concepts related to the degrees of standardization of the German language with respect to their usefulness for contemporary language description. Starting out from the traditionally used hierarchical standard/colloquialism/dialect divide and moving on to the continuum of standard/sub-standard/non-standard, he emphasizes the highly complex character of the multiple, overlapping and fluctuating categories that have been suggested by different contemporary linguists. Given the dynamics of linguistic and societal developments with the resulting impossibility of stable, unambiguous and clear-cut definitions, the author instead proposes operational definitions for the terms of standard and variation that would allow for empirically based decisions on whether certain variations should be considered as falling inside or outside the ever expanding scope of standard language. In this way, Löffler rejects prescriptive dogmatism in favor of a pragmatic approach to variation both within and beyond standard German.

These terminological quagmires are also at the heart of Ulrich Ammon's deliberations on the characteristics of standard and (diatopic) variation. Presupposing the recognition of national and regional variation of the German language, the author focuses on the sometimes neglected distinction between standard and norm. He suggests four instances of normative entities - model speakers, language codices, language experts and language authorities - reminding us that the existence, validity and legitimacy of a norm should also be viewed as separate notions. Ammon thus joins Löffler in his emphasis on the multi-layered dimensions of the question and prefers drawing a comprehensive picture to laying down hard and fast rules for the standard-variation decision.

After these two macro perspectives on the issue, Susanne Günther's contribution delves into the pragmatics of grammar variation at the example of two traditional verb final, i.e. subordinating conjunctions that seem to be developing into verb second, i.e. coordinating conjunctions in current spoken German, 'obwohl' and 'wobei'. Günther makes a case for regarding this phenomenon as an example of standard variation since it entails a change in function for these conjunctions. As corpus studies have demonstrated a clear increase in the use of these forms, the author suggests a potential scenario for language change and recommends them as accepted variations also within the context of teaching German as a second language.

This pro-variation stance is also salient in the following article by Stephan Elspass, who challenges traditional top-down approaches to the history of the German language that are based on an unattainable, elitist, written standard. Drawing on a wide range of examples, Elspass furthermore questions the notion of a finished German standard of the latter 19th century. Instead, he proposes a bottom-up history of the German language that would be truly generalized, featuring oral regional standard varieties, the notion of acceptance (Haugen, 1994), and contemporary phenomena of linguistic development.

The general tendencies of a current development with a potential for language change, destandardization, are discussed by Helmut Spiekerman in the next chapter. Based on corpus data from SW Germany comparing phonetic variation between the years of 1961 and 2001, the author describes two parallel trends, regional standardization and national destandardization. While dialectal forms seem to be decreasing, non-standard non-regional variations seem to be more widely used and thus maybe gain more acceptance in the future. While a clear-cut case for language change cannot be made due to ambivalent developments for more regional variants, Spiekerman's data support the general bottom-up trend of destandardization and a more heterogeneous standard language.

Beyond the written-oral dichotomy of standardization, Peter Schlobinski frames 'destandardization' in the context of new media. The synchronous character of hypermedia together with its typical combination of image, sound and text requires a new variation of communication - a hybrid that is not a lesser form of standard language but a purposefully optimized functional variation. At the example of internet chat and SMS communication, Schlobinski describes a variety of discursive patterns that characterize this new variation. According to the author, these phenomena should be seen as parallel developments and not necessarily as threats to conventional written language.

Returning to the realm of spoken German, Nina Berend charts the territory for a new research project on the description of regional standards of use. Based on phonetic, syntactic, morphological and lexical regional variation from a corpus collected in the 1970s by Werner König, Berend suggests four major zones of spoken standard German: north, central, south- east and south-west. With a learner of German in mind and in keeping with Durrell's (1999) principles of formal vs. informal standard, the author calls for a paradigm shift in the description of standard language and an applied linguistics focus that would result in the production of empirically grounded, inclusive, current works of reference.

Bottom-up language change through youth language is another path to language variation compatible with a contemporary view of standard language. For the purpose of documenting this process, Jannis Androutsopoulos suggests a model of language change that combines an accommodation and network-oriented micro approach with a media-oriented macro approach developed by Kotsinas (1997). Based on a newspaper corpus, the author illustrates his point at the example of 'cool', 'geil' and 'chillen', lexical items that have made their way into main-stream journalistic jargon beyond the realm of specialized genres like music, sports, young people.

As with the above examples, much of lexical innovation originating in the youth stratum,, tends to migrate over from the English speaking sphere of influence. Within this larger scope, Ulrich Busse discusses pronunciation dilemmas for English loan words in the German language. Depending on the type of word, the speaker's linguistic background, and the context of use (e.g., the media), a more English or more German oriented pronunciation may be chosen. In this context, Busse refers the reader to the critical issue of "standard" English and the need for specific inclusion of phonetic variation in works of reference.

Switching back to grammatical variation, the following contribution by Richard Schrodt illustrates the case of lack of subject-verb agreement. While some prescriptive grammar manuals tend to be restrictive in this matter, Schrodt argues that an UG-inspired approach that keeps in mind thematic rather than grammatical agreement would support a speaker- mediated decision. Term quality, subjectivity and pragmatics are key words that help frame this discursive approach to a seemingly formal linguistic cause. Once more we are faced with a paradigm shift in the direction of greater inclusiveness bolstered by a range of examples from a variety of textual sources.

In a regional study on citylects, Margret Selting examines yet another potential lieu of variation, intonational contours. Comparing Berlin speech with standard German intonational patterns and, furthermore, variations within Berlin speech of more or less standard character, Selting finds variations in the timing of pitch summit, in accent contours, in the structure of intonational phrases and in salient overall intonational contours. Even though, at this point, the study has a geographically limited focus, the results from the large-scale project on dialect intonations that is currently being undertaken should provide some interesting comparative data.

In the following chapter, Jürgen Erich Schmidt examines the different normative levels of the German language. Based on the premise of Standard German as one (literary) variety with three different oral norms (Austria, Germany, and Switzerland), Schmid suggests three levels of areality within and across these normative boundaries: trained speaker, colloquial standard and regional accent. Empirical studies seem to coincide with such a theory-based drawing of standard boundaries due to the saliency factor of areal markers. Schmid thus proposes delimiting standard German based on this factor and the concept of full variety, coinciding at the same time with the variation awareness of lay speakers.

A view from across the border, presented by Peter Bassola from the Hungarian perspective, suggests a methodological approach to the teaching of the varieties of the German language. Bassola makes a case for functional inclusion of variation according to level of schooling with a view to combining language and content in the pursuit of bilingual/bicultural identities. Language for specific purposes with its intralingual (Austria and Germany) and interlingual (Hungarian-German) variation would then be embedded in a comprehensive framework of variation, history and culture.

Another view from across the border, comparing approaches to variation in German and English, has Stephen Barbour comment on communicative interferences between English-speaking learners of German and German- speaking learners of English. Different concepts of norm (prescriptive versus descriptive) and new learner varieties, German English in this case, that is, English words used by Germans in non-English ways, can create invisible barriers in seemingly germane linguistic contexts. The author thus strongly recommends a language in society approach to language teaching from the beginning levels onwards.

In the third contribution concerning German studies abroad, Marisa Siguan portrays the language policy interplay between Spanish and Catalan and its effect on the teaching of German philology in Barcelona. Juxtaposing Spanish as a language with a long normative history and Catalan as a language which is still undergoing standardization while maintaining and extraordinary openness toward variation, Siguan considers this constellation fertile ground for variation awareness, particularly at a higher level of competence. This state of affairs leads to a focus on communication, a high degree of tolerance toward mistakes, an understanding of the arbitrariness of norms and a will to compromise.

Language users at home seem less open to variation. In his article on the prescriptive-descriptive dilemma, Matthias Wermke finds users more rule- oriented than the general tendency toward destandardization may seem to imply. Editors of normative texts are thus in a bind over what degree of prescriptiveness to include into their publications. One way out of this dilemma, according to the author, would be to introduce a distinction between descriptive and prescriptive dictionaries and thus allow for informed choices as to which manifestations of the same basic functions to use.

As a conclusion, Ludwig M. Eichinger takes the concept of norm one step further. Acknowledging the move towards more empirical research and the now accepted difference in norms for written and oral language, the author puts forward the provocative of question of whose norm is it anyway. While talking about situative norms, expectations toward genre, and appropriateness, Eichinger stresses the dynamic nature of standardization, the interplay between the linguistic and the social. He concludes by sketching the three current realms of norms to be taken into consideration by speakers: mistakes to avoid, options to choose from and symbolic social positionings to enact.

As can be seen from the above paragraphs, the IDS yearbook shows the current state of affairs in German language standardization research from a wide variety of standpoints. Conceptual pieces alternate with empirical studies, general overviews with foci on a specific linguistic feature. While this wide range of different subtopics among a total of 17 contributions has something to offer for everyone, that same diversity makes a cohesive read difficult. In this respect, the collection may have benefitted from a thematic rather than purely chronological order, maybe even supported by some introductory section paragraphs. Concerning the underlying frameworks of reference, a number of contributions echo recent developments in applied linguistics from pluricentricity (Clyne, 1995) to language awareness (Davies, 2000) and language variation as social practice (Eckert, 2000), opening the field of inquiry beyond the traditional dialectology focus in German sociolinguistics or combining the two. In a future edition of the IDS yearbook, this scope may be broadened to include other recent approaches like critical linguistics, which has a lot to offer to the whole debate of standard, variation, and norms. Still, as is, the present collection provides a most valuable state of the art overview of conceptual, empirical, and methodological developments in the study of the German language and should be included as a work of reference in any German studies library both within and without the German speaking areas.

Claudia Kunschak received her PhD in Education with a minor in German Studies from the University of Arizona (2003). She is currently teaching translation and languages for specific purposes at the Universidad Europea de Madrid. Her research interests include language variation, multilingualism and second language teaching and testing.